E178 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



DDDDSHDDSHt. 













^*^.# 












^^ ^^^**^\/ %^^-'/ ^<>.'*^\/ ^o 










^\/ ^<V^^-'/ ^^^*^!^\/ "o^*^'^%0'5 

A* ,«.'•, <*. o^ B ■ • ♦ ' 







|K*\'^^''^^ ^-W*!*' /^\ •-'»^qK^.* 's^^' -^ -yi 




'•*'/ V*^\^"^ ^^^*^-*\o'^ V*^'*^.'?'^' 











^p-^^ 



^•tq*. 



DEPARTMENT OF KANSAS, 
GEAND ARMY OF THE REPUBLIC. 



REPORT 



TAYLOR'S Model School History 



COL. O. H. COULTER, 

Department Commander, Kansas, Q. A. R. 



HON. J. G. WOOD, 

Chairman of Committee on Public Instruction, Department of Kansas, and 

Member of Committee on Military Drill and Patriotic Instruction 

in Public Schools of the National Encampment, G. A. R. 




Published by authority of the 
DEPARTMENT OF KANSAS, G. A. R. 

1899. 



TAYLOR'S MODEL SCHOOL HISTORY. 



A CRITICISM. 
Hon. J. G. Wood: 

Dear Sir and Comrade — Your attention is called to the seventh 
paragraph of General Order No. 7, which is as follows : 

"The subject of patriotic teaching in our public schools has been 
a matter of discussion and resolutions in our state and national en- 
campments for years past. Department Commander Eastman, in 
his report to the last encampment, called particvilar attention to the 
school history now in use in the public schools of our state. 

"The glaring inaccuracies, misstatements and total lack of even 
a sentiment of true Americanism within the lids of this book has 
prompted your commander to institute a more thorough review of 
this history, and for this purpose has appointed Comrade J. G. Wood^ 
of Post No. 1, with instructions to prepare a complete report, which, 
when completed, will be printed and distributed to the posts of the 
department." 

An early answer is desired. Hoping you will accept this appoint- 
ment, I remain, Yours in F., C. & L., 

O. H. COULTER, 

Department Commander. 
ToPEKA, Kan., October 20, 1899. 



REPLY. 



Col. O. H, Coulter, Department Commander: 

Dear Sir and Comrade — I am in receipt of General Order No. 
7, in which, among other things, you appoint me to prepare a report 
upon the "school history now in use in the public schools of this 
state." 

Believing that the Grand Army and its energetic and patriotic 
Commander can be engaged in no nobler object than earnest efforts 
to render the best possible assistance in inspiring the youth of the 
land with intense love of country, I am willing to lend a hand in the 
grand work. 

The Grand Army of the Republic, through its committee of the 
national encampment on military drill and patriotic instruction in 
the public schools, has entered upon a work the most far-reaching 
upon the life and character of the coming American, and the most 
important withal, of any it could undertake. There is no better 
physical exercise than military drill in its different branches. It 
steadies the nerves, gives mental x)oise and confidence in one's self. 



The subject of patriotic instruction in the public schools is broad, 
and should enlist the heartiest cooperation of every liberty-loving 
father and mother in the land. The youth should be taught, not 
only by outward symbols and observances, but by systematic in- 
struction and study, the principles underlying republican institu- 
tions; the lives and characters of the founders and defenders of 
those cardinal expressions which preceded established order, and 
the cost in human sacrifice and treasure which was paid for govern- 
ment by the people. 

The action of the Grand Army of the Republic in urging congress 
to enact law providing for the detail of regular army officers for mili- 
tary instruction in public schools is a step in the right direction, and 
should, as I have no doubt it will, receive the commendation and 
support of the mass of people. This department secure in the hands 
of men the most capable, the next step — patriotic instruction — is 
logical and easy. A short recital of cardinal principles and an ap- 
propriate greeting to the flag once a week, or as often as deemed ad- 
visable, might commend themselves to the teachers of the public 
schools. This is only a hint to those whose loyalty and patriotism 
is unquestioned. This can be greatly aided by text-books on the 
history of the country whose integrity, loyalty and patriotism is un- 
doubted. 

The scheme suggested by yourself for an examination of the his- 
torical text in use in the public schools of Kansas is worthy of your 
mind and heart ,and will receive the thanks of your comrades in arms; 
and the plaudits of well-meaning citizens everywhere, not only in 
this state, most directly interested, but throughout the union and 
in the colonies. 

To be deemed worthy of selection for such a task is an honor I 
appreciate, and in accepting the appointment I can only say I will 
do the best I can to merit your approval and of those who are asso- 
ciated with you in this patriotic enterprise. 

Hoping that you may be strengthend in your excellent purpose 
to increase the membership and usefulness of the Grand Army of the 
Republic, I remain. Yours fraternally, in P., C. & L. , 

J. G. WOOD. 

TOPEKA, Kan., October 22, 1899. 



REPORT. 



Col. 0. H. Coulter, Department Commander : 

Dear Sir and Comrade — By your order, I have ex- 
amined Taylor's Model School History of the United 
States, Kansas edition, adopted by the state text-book 
commission and now in use in the public schools of Kan- 
sas, and find it replete with inaccuracies. Its errors of 
grammar and rhetoric are numerous. A text-book should 
present its matter in an orderly and systematic manner. 
An adult who has lived cotemporaneously with printed 
history can correct blunders in this respect, but the child 
who knows nothing of history except what it gets from 
the printed page is without recourse, except a faithful and 
well-posted teacher and references to other works. The 
latter will prove this text to be simply a disorderly jumble 
of historical data, and its inaccuracies will beget want of 
confidence in the mind of the child which should be 
avoided. A text-book should at least be truthful and in- 
spire the child with entire confidence in the statement of 
facts. Theories of the author may be discussed, but when 
teacher and pupils are continually finding fault with the 
text, as in the present instance, it becomes a matter of 
grave public import. 

The author devotes seventeen pages, exclusive of two 
alleged war maps, to the civil war, and nineteen pages to 
the two terms of President Cleveland. The preface, in 
speaking of the design and scope of the work, says : 

It does not make a specialty of military details. It is not a 
" drum and trumpet" history. Men are perceiving that war is a. 
brutal, even if sometimes necessary, method of adjusting national 
differences, and that that is a very barren national life which pro- 
duces nothing better than the repetition of military deeds. 

It is a growing opinion with teachers of the young that it is time 
some other history than military were taught in our schools. His- 

(4) 



tory is a much nobler thing than a mere record of bloodshed. War 
plays a small part in the real history of modern nations, and in that 
of the United States it is smaller than any other. It has been the 
design, therefore, without ignoring military history, to divest it of 
its details, and to present the salient features of the campaigns as 
the only thing the interests of the pupils demand. 

The author, it is surmised, in the paragraph just quoted, 
laid the groundwork for his treatment of the civil war in 
subsequent pages. He would have you believe it a high 
moral stand he has taken, and that it is a part of his phi- 
losophy to omit "the details," as he terms them, of military 
history. But, as will be shown hereafter, he fails to hide 
his want of patriotism, and a yet more serious want, that of 
a conscientious regard for the pupils he pretends to in- 
struct. 

"History," he says, "is a much nobler thing than a mere 
record of bloodshed." But what there is of bloodshed in 
the history of a nation, or the nations, should not be ignored 
by the conscientious historian. If limited by the design 
of his work, the greater reason for exact and truthful state- 
ments and concise conclusions of pivotal incidents. The 
wars of a nation are as much a part of its history — their 
causes, conduct, and results — as the upbuilding of its civil 
institutions, which are frequently the outgrowth of the 
bloody conflicts. 

"War plays a small part in the 7'eal history of modem 
nations, and in that of the United States it is smaller than 
any other," says the author. 

Every modern nation is the outgrowth of repeated bap- 
tisms of human blood, and the cost of these are the bur- 
dens pressing heavily on modern life. Perhaps the nations 
are learning more peaceful methods of adjusting interna- 
tional affairs, but armaments were never heavier, diplomatic 
eyes and ears were never wider open; and the Venezuelan 
compromise award, against every principle of justice and 
equity, gives no hope to the advocates of arbitration for the 
settlement of international questions. Modern inventive 
genius is ever active in exploiting new and more destruc- 
tive engines of war. Some pretend to believe that the very 
nature of these instruments of war will eventually cause 



6 

nations to recoil from conflict. But the patriotic rush to 
arms of the two leading civilized nations within the last 
two years gives little hope for the predictions of the peace- 
at-any-price people. 

This nation has had six wars within 123 years, averaging 
one for each period of less than twenty-five years of national 
life. Each was necessary and involved fundamental prin- 
ciples. The civil war was the result of national records 
which smelled to high heaven, and meant more to this na- 
tion and humanity everywhere than can be couched in words. 
Coming generations and civilizations can alone adequately 
estimate its value. The youth of America should be taught 
the causes, conduct, and results, immediate and remote, of 
the wars in their own land. The details should be given 
as fully as required to impress the children with the sacri- 
fice and cost of the government they enjoy and soon to in- 
herit its respon.sibilities. The great heroes of these wars, 
the stability, endurance and j)atriotic devotion of the rank 
and file, also the zeal and tender solicitude of the citizen 
at home for those at the front, should be portrayed to the 
children, so that they may have some adequate conception 
of the value of free institutions. 

To ignore war in a nation's history ! War is the very 
apex and culmination of those profound emotions that 
agitate a people. War is the quintessence of history while 
it continues. A century's wrongs culminate in war, and 
are righted. That is history! 

The aim of our teachers should be to teach history in all 
its verities, and the text-books should be truthful and 
patriotic so far as they pretend to instruct the pupil. 

The more carefully the work is examined the greater 
will its shortcomings appear. A few examples will answer 
present purposes. The surrender of Lee is told in nine 
lines, without date, except it is recounted in the paragraph 
under the subhead, "1865." The place of that crowning 
event of the civil war is not given ; indeed, the word "Ap- 
pomattox" is not found in the book. General Grant is 
nowhere mentioned in connection with the surrender, Lee, 
however, is credited with surrendering "his army on terms 



honorable to both the victor and the vanquished." The 
terms of surrender, ever honorable in civil wars ; the mag- 
nanimity of Grant, who embodied the spirit of the Northern 
people and the government; the request of General Lee 
that owners of horses be allowed to take them, and the ready 
consent of Grant, who said they would need them to do 
their spring plowing, are omitted. Lee is given entire 
credit for the surrender and its terms. Such a momentous 
event should have more than nine lines devoted to it, es- 
pecially when it is considered that a large j)ercentage of the 
public-school children will be limited to this text-book for 
their knowledge of the history of their own country. Few 
schools and fewer teachers are provided with reference 
libraries for the proper study of history. 

At page 167, Taylor, in sjDeaking of the compilation of 
Webster's Unabridged Dictionary, says the plan was "very 
desirable, in order that we might become a nation of one 
uniform language as well as one government." Then he 
says : "It, with its later though powerful rival, Worcester's 
Dictionary, has aided us in escaping differences in spelling 
and pronunciation and in becoming a nation of one lan- 
guage." 

No one ever had the temerity to claim superiority in 
definitions of Worcester over Webster ; so that Worcester 
rivaled Webster in the estimation of some scholastics just 
to the extent that he differed in orthography and pronun- 
ciation. What kind of logic is it that concludes that the 
exploitation of radical differences in " orthograjohy," "pro- 
nunciation" and "meaning of words" "has aided us in 
escaping differences in spelling and pronunciation " ? 
Worcester was compelled to differ with Webster in order 
to make a dictionary, but what advantage has accrued to 
deepen the foundation of uniformity in our language does 
not appear. So far it has only enabled some people to 
differ with Webster with some show of authority. 

In presenting Monroe's administration (1817-25). the 
author credits John C. Calhoun's petition, signed by the 
merchants and planters of South Carolina, for a high tariff 
on imported goods, protection to domestic industries, as 



the "origin" of the "so-called American system of protec- 
tion." Observe how near he comes to historic accuracy. 
The second act passed by congress in 1789 under the con- 
stitution was entitled "An act to protect the industries of 
the country." This act was signed by George Washington, 
who with his successors, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison, 
favored in the strongest terms in their messages protection 
to domestic industries. From 1789 to 1816 there were 
passed seven acts for protection. Jefferson and Madison 
at one time favored free trade, but later became strong ad- 
vocates of protection. They were forced to this conclusion 
by seeing the unequaled struggle of domestic products 
with the output of cheap labor in foreign countries. As a 
matter of fact, all the tariff acts — twenty-four in number, 
exclusive of the Dingley act — have been protective, except 
five, including the Wilson act. 

At page 187, the author, in speaking of the Monroe doc- 
trine, says: "Though seemingly a very haughty preten- 
sion, it has ever since, in a modified form, been the settled 
policy of the government." When was it "modified," and 
during what administration ? Certainly not at the close of 
the civil war, when Secretary Seward notified Napoleon 
III that his military schemes in Mexico were undesirable, 
and he was given six months to get out of the country ! 
He had betaken his army in three months. President 
Cleveland was lauded for the advanced position that he 
took in the Venezuelan boundary dispute. 

In the administration of John Quincy Adams labor be- 
came scarce, whereupon the author says, at page 193 : "In- 
vention became a necessity to the people." The inventive 
faculty is innate, and confined to comparatively few indi- 
viduals. As a rule inventions bring the necessity for their 
use with them. After utilizing the improvement, then the 
people say: "We wonder how we did without it." Espe- 
cially is this true of the earlier days of labor-saving de- 
vices. The individual invents ; not the people, who have 
been exceedingly slow to adopt the new device. Invention 
is a mental process, and in no sense "became a necessity to 
the people." 



9 

At page 200, the text again states: "It is a strange fact 
that the first protective law of 1816," etc., etc., when in fact 
the people had had protection from 1789 to 1816, when low 
tarifPs were enacted, bringing the inevitable desolation and 
ruin until 1821, when protection again was ascendant. 

At page 194 this expression occurs: "Soon afterward 
we introduced locomotives in America." "We" of what 
generation ? We know we did nothing of the kind. A 
better statement is : Soon afterward locomotives were in- 
troduced in America. 

At page 258 it says: "The most notable event of the 
war occurred on the 1st of January, 1863, when President 
Lincoln issued one of the most important documents of 
modern times, the Emancipation Proclamation." The proc- 
lamation was issued September 22, 1862, in which he gave 
100 days for the rebels to lay down their arras, or be de- 
prived of their slaves. To those who laid down their arms 
he promised iraraunity from the terms of the proclamation. 
January 1st he issued another proclamation simply setting 
forth the states and parts of states which had refused the 
conditions and were still in rebellion. Leading events 
should be more carefully and accurately set forth. 

At page 265 the text says : "At one time two dollars 
and eighty cents in paper were required to buy one dollar 
in gold. . . . The confederate debt will probably never 
be jDaid, that government having been overthrown." The 
mere fact that the "government" of the confederacy was 
overthrown would hardly be sufficient reason for the non- 
payment of that debt. The chief reason for its non-pay- 
ment, which is not referred to, is section 4, article 14, 
amendment to the constitution of the United States, which 
prohibits any state or the nation from assuming or paying it. 

Referring to national banks, at page 266 the text says : 
"The treasury of the United States furnished the currency" 
for the national bank circulation, "and guaranteed its re- 
demption." 

The government does not guarantee the circulation of 
national banks. United States bonds are purchased in 
open market and deposited with the treasurer of the United 



10 

states as collateral security for the notes issued by the 
national banks. The treasury is simply the custodian of 
the collateral. If the bonds held as such collateral should 
decline in value below the face of the notes outstanding, 
the notes would be at a corresponding discount, and the 
government is not under any obligation to keep them at 
par. Children should have precise and accurate statements 
in their text-books. 

At the bottom of page 268 it is said : "Homestead laws 
date back to the year 1830. Their object was to regulate 
the disposal of lands to actual settlers by giving a preempt- 
ive right." The plain inference here is, that this was a 
general law for settling the public domain by purchasers. 

The law referred to was passed May 29, 1830, and, among 
other things, provided : "That every settler or occupant of 
the public lands prior to the passage of this act, who is 
now in possession and cultivated any part thereof in the 
year 1829, shall be and he is hereby authorized to enter, 
with the register of the land office, . . . not more than 
160 acres, or a quarter-section, to include his imjjrovements, 
upon paying to the United States the then minimum price 
of said land." Section 5, the last section, provides that " this 
act shall be and remain in force for one year from and after 
its passage." 

It will be readily seen that this act was simply an act to 
care for those who had gone into the wilderness and squatted 
on public land. It was in no sense "to regulate the dis- 
posal of public lands." 

The agitation for "free homes for free people," which is 
the basic principle of the homestead act, first found public 
expression in the twelfth declaration of principles in the 
free-soil convention at Pittsburg, Pa., August 11, 1852, as 
follows : 

"That the public lands of the United States belong to 
the people and should not be sold to individuals nor granted 
to corporations, but should be held as a sacred trust for the 
benefit of the people, and should be granted in limited 
quantities, free of cost, to actual settlers." 

Beginning here, the agitation was kept up until Presi- 



11 

dent Lincoln signed the Homestead Bill in May, 1862. The 
senate had previously refused to pass a homestead measure 
originating in the house, and President Buchanan vetoed 
a bill that passed both houses of congress. The South was 
almost a unit against any homestead measure because they 
foresaw the result in the growing power of the North. 

The space given this criticism is justified by the fact that 
fhe passage of the homestead act marked the beginning of 
an era which has resulted in the mighty empires of the 
West. Such events should have correct setting in history 
intended for the rising generations of America. 

At page 273, the author, in speading of the presidential 
camjoaign of 1868, says : "The campaign was attended with 
much excitement, but there was no prominent issue before 
the people. . . . Politics looked back to the past in- 
stead of forward to the future." 

A careful reading of the democratic and republican na- 
tional platforms of 1868 will convince any candid patriot 
that they bristled with propositions for future consumma- 
tion. Besides the inaccuracies, inexcusable blunders and 
omissions of the book, it impresses the reader with a want 
of dignity. 

At page 290, speaking of the campaign of 1880, the au- 
thor says: "The republicans adopted a resolution equivo- 
cal in form, but understood to favor a protective tariff." 

The republican platform of 1880 says : "We reaffirm the 
belief avowed in 1876 that the duties levied for the purpose 
of revenue should so discriminate as to favor American 
labor." 

The platform of 1876, which. is reaffirmed, is : "The reve- 
nue . . . from duties upon importations, so far as possi- 
ble, should be adjusted to promote the interests of American 
labor and advance the prosperity of the whole country." 
Whatever equivocation, Taylor has permission to appropri- 
ate. But what significance in such a remark in a historical 
text for children ? 

On the same page the author, speaking of the campaign 
of 1880, says: "But it was observable that political ques- 
tions were little argued. Again politics took color from 



12 

the struggles of the past, and the canvass was a contest for 
office and victory, rather than for the supremacy of princi- 
ples." 

Those who lived in 1880, and were old enough to know 
and appreciate what occurred in that campaign, will recall 
that it was most bitterly fought along the lines drawn in 
the platforms of the two parties contesting. While it is 
true some partizans and their followers contest only for tire 
spoils of office, it cannot be said of the mass of the elector- 
ate. They are not aspirants for office, and work and vote 
for what they conscientiously believe should be inwrought 
into the warp and woof of government. Whatever may be 
true in the j^remises, such remarks are undignified, and 
should find no place in a child's text-book. 

The author indulges in similar phrases, at page 308, in 
relation to the presidential campaign of 1888. He says : 
"It was a well-matched contest over the old issue of high 
taxes, for the purjjose of protection, against low ones, for the 
sake of revenue. The exact truth [mark the language] was 
that the leaders of neither of the major parties cared so 
much for the supremacy of principles as for the spoils of 
victory. ... It would be too much to assert that the 
debate towered above sophistical argument, or that the 
purity of the ballot-box was maintained.'" 

The "high taxes," as he calls them, had been assailed 
under the cry of "tariff reform," by the presidential in- 
cumbent, and the indCistries of the country were endan- 
gered. Hence the interest taken in the contest. And the 
sequel shows that the struggle was not merely for the 
"spoils of victory." For the cry of "tariff reform" came 
four years later, and we all realized the consequences of 
the mistakes of 1890 and 1892. And the last three years 
we have been reminded forcibly of the difference between 
the two generals — General Prosperity and General Adver- 
sity. The short addresses delivered to the thousands of 
people, from all parts of the country, by General Harrison, 
at his home in Indianapolis, marked him a man of marvel- 
ous versatility, varied attainments, and profound statesman- 
ship. There was no "sophistry" in his remarks. They 



13 

were the convictions of a wise and patriotic statesman, 
and have been verified in every essential detail in the past 
eight years of national life. The thousands of men and 
women who heard him were not office-seekers, but they 
were the sovereigns of the republic, renewing their faith 
and seeking light. "The purity of the ballot-box was 
maintained" as w^ell as usual; at least we have no proof to 
the contrary. At best, the lines quoted are slurs, and ill 
become a history for the youth of this land. 

At page 297 this statement is made: "The triumph of 
Cleveland and Hendricks was regarded by the democrats 
as a popular rebuke of what they were accustomed to call 
"the electoral-commission fraud of 1876." Whenever the 
author of this book gets an opportunity to allege fraud 
against the party opposed to his political views he seems 
to gloat over it. If the people had not continued the re- 
publicans in power for the term immediately succeeding 
"the electoral-commission fraud," there would be more 
grace and yet more truth in denominating the election of 
Cleveland and Hendricks "a rebuke." This history bears 
date 1898, before which time the highest judicial tribunal 
in New York had decided that 5000 votes corruptly counted 
for Cleveland and Hendricks were cast for General Butler 
and should have been so counted, in which case Blaine and 
Logan would have been declared elected. So as a matter 
of fact Cleveland and Hendricks were not elected and the 
alleged "rebuke" fails. If the historians (?) who wrote 
the last chapters of this book in order to bring it "up to 
date" had been as fully comi^etent morally and intellectu- 
ally to write history as they were to inject personal passions 
and prejudices into it, they would not have been oblivious 
to patent errors. 

The allegation of "fraud" in the electoral commission 
of 187(3 has no evidence to support it, and has never 
emerged from the swaddling clothes of low-bred partizan- 
ship. The charge comes with poor grace from those who 
originated and proposed the same electoral commission. 

There seems to have been an effort to stuff the first ad- 
ministration of Cleveland. Evt'nts are crowded into that 



14 

period which do not belong there and have no significance 
whatever in connection with the incidents of that adminis- 
tration. For instance, on page 301, the organization of the 
Grand Army of the Republic is cited. "They grouped 
themselves," says the writer, "into G. A. R. posts or lodges." 
" Grand Army posts" are not "lodges," and are not and never 
were known as such. "They," says the writer, " maintained a 
military organization." The Grand Army of the Republic 
is not a " military " organization, and never " maintained " 
such. The Grand Army of the Republic was organized in 
1866, at Decatur, 111., but the only impression the pupils 
get from Taylor's history of this organization is that it 
came into existence during Cleveland's first administration. 
In the same paragraph it says : " Pensions were liberally 
bestowed by the government upon its needy defenders and 
their families." 

"Pensions" are here mentioned for the first and only 
time in the book. This administration incurred much just 
censure and odium for the vetoes of Cleveland of private 
pension acts. Pensions were first granted in 1776 ; the 
third act of congress under the constitution of 1789 pro- 
vided for pensions. The first pension act after the civil 
war began was in 1862. Pensions are not granted alone to 
"needy" defenders. Loss of arms, legs, feet, hands, fingers, 
sight, hearing, incurred in the service, in line of duty, en- 
titles the "defenders" to a specific pension, fixed by law, 
no matter about "needs," nor whether he has any. 

If of sufficient historical interest to be spoken of in a 
public-school text-book, it certainly should be accurately 
stated, both as to dates and beneficiaries. And especially 
they should not be credited to an administration which was 
scandalized by the vetoes of its chief. 

In the next paragraph, in the same administration, the 
book says: "About this time [no time mentioned before 
this time since October, 1885] great interest was aroused 
by the discovery and use of natural gas." 

A female teacher in one of the Topeka city schools re- 
called to me the discovery and use of natural gas near her 
home at Fredonia, N. Y., as early as 1859. The owner 



15 

utilized the gas in his residence. Long before this, even 
in Indian traditions, we have accounts of oil on certain 
lakes and inflammable gas arising therefrom. From such 
loose, untimely and disorderly statements of events the pu- 
pils are confused and their time is worse than wasted in 
storing up falsehood and misrepresentations. 

On page 306 we are informed that "the secretary was 
charged with business relating to pensions, public lands, 
Indians, patents, and agriculture. So great were the de- 
mands at the last that it was found necessary to establish 
a new department of state." In fact, the United States has 
not now and never did have but one department of state. 
The part of the government which has charge of agricul- 
tural matters is known as the department of agriculture 
and its head is the secretary of agriculture. If this is a 
department of state, how shall the student determine be- 
tween them ? The title " department of state " refers to 
but one thing, and never to agriculture. 

At page 314 we read : "A few of the states had passed 
laws prohibiting the importation and sale of alcoholic liq- 
uors, but these were nullified by the original-package de- 
cision, made by the supreme court. It declared that 
liquor may be imported into a iDrohibition state and sold 
there, if it be kept in the original package of the manufac- 
turer." 

No state ever ijrohibited the "importation" of liquors 
into a state. Prohibition states have never gone farther 
than the iDrohibition of the sale and manufacture of intoxi- 
cating liquors, except for certain prescribed purposes. 
Prohibition of the "importation" of liquors, would be 
clearly unconstitutional. 

The supreme court of the United States never nullified 
the prohibitory laws of any state, but on the contrary have 
sustained them in every case submitted. The supreme 
court did decide that liquors in the original packeige may 
be imported into a prohibitory state, but its legal sale 
therein must be in accordance with the state law. 

That decision was rendered on an appealed case from 
the United States court for the district of Kansas, and in- 
volved the constitutionality of the prohibitory law of Kan- 



16 

sas. Children'of Kansas know that prohibition is still the 
law of Kansas, and yet the alleged history of the United 
States they study teaches them that the United States su- 
preme court nullified the law. 

The second paragraph in Cleveland's second adminis- 
tration opens with the following: "Hard times, which had 
set in during Harrison's term of office, continued during the 
whole of this." 

This is simply a bold, bald, bad lie, related for the sole 
purpose of relieving Cleveland's second term of the odium 
attaching to it, by reason of policies inaugurated by him 
and his party. This republic never before experienced 
such i)rosperity as during Harrison's administration, after 
the enactment of the McKinley bill." 

Speaking of the eleventh census, of 1890, at page 311 he 
says: " The census report gave much unexpected informa- 
tion of a statistical nature. Among other things, it showed 
that a greater per cent, of the people were foreign born 
than ever before ; that all our schools ha(i not been able to 
reduce the rate of illiteracy ; and that the expenses of gov- 
ernment were increasing faster than our population." 

Here the child is left without a word of explanation of 
such conditions in our country. A very few words would 
have shown that between 1870 and 1880, owing to the un- 
settled industrial and financial conditions, foreign immi- 
gration was limited, and literacy made a distinct gain ; 
those over ten years of age unable to read being 13.4 per 
cent., and those unable to write being 17 per cent., and il- 
literacy of the foreign-born population being 25 per cent. 
In 1870 the corresponding percentages for those who could 
not read and write were 16 and 20, respectively. In^ 1890 
the illiteracy for the population over ten years of age 
was 13.3 per cent., showing a small gain over 1880, not- 
withstanding the unparalleled influx of foreigners during 
the 1880-90 decade, and especially notwithstanding the 
contrary assertion of the author. 

His remark about the expenses of government increasing 
faster than population springs from prejudice or an un- 
l)liilosophical mind. 

There is no necessary connection between expenses of 



17 

government and population. A high civilization is costly, 
and not in proportion to population. "Per capita" is a 
dangerous expression in the lexicon of narrow minds. A 
county commissioner in Cabell county, West Virginia, once 
boasted to me that the county was out of debt and had 
$1500 in bank. Statistics of the county showed an average 
annual loss of 20 men and 100 head of cattle at the fords, all 
this for the want of several thousand dollars expended for 
bridges. There was not a bridge in the county. Again, if 
all the schools in Kansas were furnished with reference 
libraries, complete sets of apparatus, maps and charts, 
pictures on the walls, and slate blackboards, as they should 
be, and then over all, and the most important of all, a 
thoroughly well educated, trained and thoroughly compe- 
tent teacher, at remunerative wages, as there should be in 
each school, the schools would cost more without any ap- 
preciable increase in population. But such increased cost 
would more than be repaid. Certain it is, with such schools 
and teachers, no such text-books as Taylor's Model School 
History of the United States could possibly be placed in a 
school curriculum. 

At page 322, in speaking of the McKinley-Bryan cam- 
paign, the text-book relates : "The campaign was conducted 
in a dignified and honorable way. There was but one issue 
— the silver question. 

Taylor did not write that. It was part of one of the last 
three chapters of the book, which were written to bring the 
former edition up to date. There is, however, no observ- 
able difference between the closing chajjters and the rest of 
the book. In style and method they are the same. In in- 
nuendo, misrepresentations, falsehood and illogical conclu- 
sions they follow the preceding samples. 

There was another issue, and very important one : protec- 
tion of American industry. Great posters were put up at 
everj^ cross-road, showing the prevalent depressed condi- 
tions on the one side, and upon the other the happy results 
to flow from a protective tariff. McKinley's campaign talks 
were almost exclusively confined to his theory of relief. 
The thousands who went from many industrial centers to 



18 

Canton were not drawn thither by the silver issue, but they 
wanted to hear the "advance agent" of prosperity. There 
are no excuses for such wanton misstatement of fact, be- 
cause, at the very time the twenty-third chapter was written, 
the i^rosperity predicted by McKinley was making rapid 
strides. 

The partizanism of the book is patent and amazing. 
There is a studied effort at every turn to prejudice the chil- 
dren against certain propositions in the history of their 
country, and mislead them in relation to many important 
events. 

It is a difficult task to write history of current events 
and the living actors, but there is no apology for publish- 
ing unblushing falsehood. Adults may correct errors as 
they read, but the school children have no experience nor 
prior knowledge by which to correct their text-books. I 
say iQ:&.i-hooks, because I am creditably informed that Tay- 
lor's History is not the only book in the common schools of 
Kansas which should not be there. 

The first paragraph of McKinley's administration, page 
323, says : "It seems not a little strange that his views on 
the supreme question of the campaign were unknown at 
the time of his nomination." 

This at best is a slur, and unworthy a place in history ; 
and worse than that, it is absolutely false. 

No intimation is given of the "supreme question of the 
hour," and the query naturally arises, What does a child 
when a student of history know of the "supreme question 
of the hour"? 

Paragraph 590 says : "As years passed away the war-time 
issues were forgotten." No part of history has engaged more 
careful attention of historians than the causes and results 
— the "issues" — of the wars which have commanded the 
brain and brawn of men. These are cherished and handed 
down from generation to generation as priceless heirlooms, 
for reproof and emulation. No class of citizens have been 
more honored in prose and poetry than those who have set- 
tled these issues upon fields of carnage. The path of the 
human family to all it- holds dear in modern civilization is 



19 

strewn with the wreck and ruin of war. The issues of the 
civil war have never been forgotten, and sad will be the day 
when they shall be. The issues of the conflict should be 
truthfully taught to the coming generations ad infinittim. 
And they will be ; for when the actual participants are gone 
and the issues and results become matters of cold history, 
evidenced by the records on file, the historian will then be 
divested of all personal interest, and his judgment will be 
clear and conclusive. These issues, instead of being for- 
gotten, are growing more important as the years roll by. 

The name of John A. Logan, conceded to be the greatest 
volunteer soldier of the civil war, is barely mentioned as a 
candidate for vice-president and in a subsequent necrology. 

Pivotal battles with important and far-reaching sequeise 
are passed without comment or omitted entirely. Indeed, 
after a careful reading of the book, it is very difficult to 
determine any reason for the surrender of the Southern 
armies. 

Decisive victories are belittled into drawn battles. No 
union soldier except Grant receives a word of praise in 
that book, while General Lee is spoken of as "a man of 
high military talents" and "Stonewall" Jackson as "brave 
and skilful." 

The name of John Ericsson, the inventor of the pro- 
pellor and Monitor which revolutionized lake and ocean 
navigation and naval armament, has six words given him. 

At page 287, in speaking of President Hayes's veto of the 
bill to increase silver coinage, the author remarks : " Veto 
was only vote with the letters differently arranged." Of 
course this is a slur ; but what sense is in it or what help it 
gives a young student of American history, you must 
determine. Such a remark would more befit a low^-grade 
stump speech than a history of the United States for chil- 
dren. 

There are two maps to represent the seat of the conflicts 
in the east and west during the civil war. Aside from the 
names of a few prominent towns and the courses of rivers 
there is absolutely nothing to indicate where or when bat- 



20 

ties were fought nor the disposition of the contending 
forces. An ordinary school atlas will show better than 
these maps, so far as knowledge of the war is concerned, 
because they are larger and far more accurate. On the 
map pretending to illustrate the eastern campaigns of the 
rebellion, Antietam is not located. Neither the location of 
the first or second Bull Run battles are noted. Chancellors- 
ville is omitted. The battle points in West Virginia are 
not noted. The map of western campaigns is equally de- 
ficient. 

Three very important naval engagements — Island No. 
10, Memphis, and New Orleans — are not mentioned in the 
text. The victory at Island No. 10 opened the Mississippi 
as far south as Fort Pillow. High ofiicials at Richmond 
said : "No single battle-field has yet afforded to the North 
such visible fruits of victory as have been gathered at 
Island No. 10." 

When Farragut anchored off New Orleans he sent Bailey 
to the city authorities with a flag, demanding the immedi- 
ate surrender of the city, and informing them that no flag- 
but that of the United States would be allowed to float in 
presence of the fleet. The city was taken, and the Missis- 
sippi was cleared both above and below Vicksburg. It was 
a great victory ; the nation was jubilant, and President 
Lincoln issued a cheerful proclamation, and in honor 
thereof terminated the blockade of the ports Beaufort, Port 
Royal, and New Orleans. It was a heavy loss to the South. 

Pollard says : " It annihilated us in Louisiana, dimin- 
ished our resources and supplies by the loss of one of the 
greatest grain and cattle countries within the bounds of 
the confederacy; gave to the enemy the Mississippi river 
with all its means of navigation for a base of operations, 
and finally led by plain and irresistible conclusion to our 
virtual abandonment of the great and fruitful valley of the 
Mississippi." 

The naval engagement at Memphis lasted a half hour, 
but when at its height the scene was grand and impress- 
ive in a high degree. When the cloud of smoke rose and 



21 

the wreck was revealed, the last hope of Memphis had per- 
ished. The fall of Memphis left the Mississippi compara- 
tively unobstructed as far down as Vicksburg. 

These naval conflicts were the most unique in all his- 
tory, because the fleets were composed of armored war 
craft and gunboats fashioned after Ericsson's Monitor. 
General Sherman said : "The possession of the Mississippi 
river is the possession of America." Yet here were three 
of the greatest naval engagements in history, securing that 
great waterway to the union side, and yet Taylor did not 
deem them of sufficient importance to even note them by 
name. 

The author says the surrender of Vicksburg "opened 
the Mississippi from Cairo to the Gulf." The three naval 
conflicts noted above "opened" the Mississippi in 1862, 
while the victory of Vicksburg, in 1863, settled the open- 
ing permanently. 

The author of this history seems to have no familiarity 
with the sequelae of great battles. He dismisses the battle 
of Murfreesboro or Stone River with the word "indecisive." 

Why not put a few terse words in two or three lines, and 
tell the student that it was one of the greatest battles of 
the war, and determined forever that the confederates could 
not break through the line of investment between the Cum- 
berland mountains and the free states. Three desperate 
attempts had failed. The points determined by this "in- 
decisive" battle were of the greatest significance and filled 
the whole people with joy. 

Chickamauga was "a severe defeat for a large union 
army," says the author, but not a word of the results of the 
series of stubborn contests thereabouts. 

Why not note the name of a general who will live for- 
ever in American history — "The Rock of Chickamauga" — 
General Thomas? 

Put in a word here and there to inspire the American 
youth with the great characters of our history. Not a word 
is said of that hero ; not an incident of the stirring events 
leading up to his well-earned nom de plume. When tele- 



22 

graphed by General Grant to "hold Chattanooga at all 
hazards," he answered, "I will hold the town until we 
starve.'" Taylor would compile a history of the Philippine 
campaign, and omit to mention the invincible Twentieth 
Kansas, and their gallant Col. Fred. Funston, who, when 
asked on the morning of the battle at Caloocan if he could 
hold the line in his front, replied: "Until my regiment is 
mustered out." 

The great battle of Mobile Harbor, which took place in 
August, 1864, is omitted. The victory was gained after a 
terrific contest, and caused great joy throughout the North. 
Farragut, who directed the battle, became the national idol. 
He was spoken of as the American Nelson. Farragut in 
the shrouds of the Hartford, with the tempest of war rag- 
ing below him, is a grand historic picture not unworthy to 
hang side by side with the "Death of Nelson." Neither 
Farragut, except a small woodcut, nor his famous battles of 
Mobile Harbor, New Orleans, nor the capture of Fort Mor- 
gan, have a place in this history. 

I have given above a few of the more flagrant defects 
and omissions of Taylor's Model School History. It must 
be read with the greatest care, line by line, to ascertain the 
numerous mistakes, to call them by no harsher name. 

Taylor, evidently, is not judicially minded, nor of suffi- 
cient investigative habit to be entrusted with the compila- 
tion of history through which he or his associates and 
friends have lived. 

Many of the statements of this book are gross misstate- 
ments. The book before me is the "revised edition" of 
1898, which is presumed to correct the mistakes, errors and 
omissions of all former editions. As a matter of fact, the 
revision consists of three additional chapters to the old edi- 
tion, to bring it "up to date." 

Originally compiled for use in the St. Louis city schools, 
it was discarded for its utter worthlessness. But when 
Kansas adopted the uniform-text-book law, the old plates 
were brought out of hiding and ofPered to the state text- 
book commission, who accepted the offer and imposed it 
upon the schools of this state for five years. 



23 

It would be a mild judgment to say they were severally 
and collectively totally unfit to be entrusted with the selec- 
tion of text-books, especially on history for the children of 
Kansas. 

There should be one universal verdict: "Condemned be 
he who wilfully teaches any child error." 

Taylor's History should be taken from the pupils and 
stricken from the public-school curriculum. 

The current text-book contracts run five years, with- 
out any means by which a poor book may be eliminated 
from the schools. State Superintendent Frank Nelson 
makes the following suggestions, which are fully and 
heartily indorsed : 

A few words regarding state uniformity. If the state-uniformity 
law, as we now have it, has given us good books, or better books 
than we had before the enactment of the law, then it must be con- 
ceded that uniformity has been a boon to the educational interests 
of the state. On the other hand, if experience has taught us that 
the books now in use as a result of state uniformity are of an in- 
ferior quality, then it is reasonable to infer that the law has not 
served the best educational interests. Without entering into a dis- 
cussion of the relative merits of state uniformity, I believe that I 
voice the sentiments of the teachers of the state when I say that we 
all desire to have the very best books in our schools. There is no 
valid reason why the children of Kansas should be offered books of 
a secondary nature. And yet, as the law now stands, when a book 
has once been adopted, whether good or bad, it must be used during 
the term specified in the law. If a poor book is adopted, the educa- 
tional interests of the state suffer just to that extent. 

It seems to me, therefore, that the educational interests of the 
state would be well served if we could secure a modification of the 
present state-uniformity law, so as to give the state text-book com- 
mission authority to replace a text-book when such text-book has 
been found to be below the standard required for successfvil work in 
the classroom. Such modifications would involve an amendment to 
the present law. The proposed amendment should provide and give 
power to the state text-book commission to annul any contract upon 
sixty days' notice, and such power to annul said contract should be 
a part and parcel of every contract made by the state text-book com- 
mission with the publishers for furnishing text-books to the schools 
of Kansas. A provision of this kind would bring to the text-book 
commission and to the state of Kansas only first-class text-books, as 
no publisher having an inferior text, and knowing it to be such, will 
dare attempt to foist it upon the schools of Kansas, with the full 
knowledge that the text-book commission has the power to annul any 



24 

contract at any time on evidence of the inferiority of any text-book 
secured. Under this provision, the educational interests of the state 
would be placed in the hands of the people, the teachers, and the 
state educational authorities, rather than in the hands of the pub- 
lishers. This is the way it should be. 

With such modification of the law it would be a very easy matter 
to eliminate inferior text-books from our schools. It is my judgment 
that such modification could be made without in any way impairing 
the validity of the law or the primary object of state uniformity. 
We would still have uniformity, but it would be upon a higher, 
broader and safer basis. The text-book commission should be au- 
thorized to satisfy itself fully from time to time in regard to the 
relative merits of the books adopted and in use. This could be done 
by a legal enactment requiring county and city superintendents to 
report at a specified time to the state superintendent in regard to 
the relative merits of each and every book adopted by the commis- 
sion. Such report would form an intelligent and correct basis for 
the guidance of the commission, and upon this report the commission 
would base its action. With such provision, the uniformity law 
would stimulate and strengthen the educational work of the state. 

Respectfully submitted, in F., C. & L., 

J. G. WOOD, 

Chairman Committee on Patriotic 
Instruction, Department of Kansas, 
and member of Committee on 
Military Drill and Patriotic In- 
struction in Public Schools of 
the National Encampment, G. A. R. 

ToPEKA, Kan., December 20, 1899. 



WIS 3 



»^'% o 













1 V<<^ • 




^'\-^;:>- /^^'J^^^\ ^"/^k*"- ./ 



^^^ 









'^o^ 

^^°^ 















./"-*. 



'•". ^ jy .i:^'. *> v" •1*-°- < 



»•">. 








: %,^ '^ 



'C-k ft » t • • * "^ 











*-i.%*' 

.♦^■V 
■y ^ 










"hV 



^^•n^. 




rA(S^ 







^0 ^ 












"^-^^0^ 



«*^ 



•\^^ ^O.*^f**0'5 V'^7^\^^^ "^.^^f'*/ 



























WERT 
BOOtCBiNCXNC 

Craniville, Pa 
Se=t-Crt. iSaj 



. ^*'\ 



